Xbox vs. PS2 vs. Gamecube
Which do you think is best?
Total Votes : 0
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 4:20am
Post 1 of 66
Now that some time has passed, and that we've seen the capabilities of each system, as well as knowing the big games that will be coming out this fall...
Which one do you think is best?
Andwhich, if any, do you own?
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 4:22am
Post 2 of 66
Oh, and by the way...
I'm for the xbox. (I own it).
Followed by ps2,
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 4:24am
Post 3 of 66
AHHHH! This topic has come from scope to reak havoc over everyone. Ban Hajiku_Flip from this convo immediatly ! Haha
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 5:02am
Post 4 of 66
i second that.
if you want to read about this, then go here: http://www.scope-entertainment.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=XForum&file=viewthread&tid=40
i vote you close this topic, it will just get out of hand like it has in every other place its been.
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 5:43am
Post 5 of 66
I have a PS2, mainly because I HAD to play Metal Gear Solid 2 as soon as it came out.
Though now, with it's lower price, X-Box is looking sweet.
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 6:31am
Post 6 of 66
I have to bite my tongue on this one. If there is one thing that upsets me the most, is how ignorant some people can be when it comes to consoles. SFB said it right, I have..to...stay...away...
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 7:23am
Post 7 of 66
I am really for PS2! got alot of games, the grafic isnt the best relly.. but its a clasic!
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 8:33am
Post 8 of 66
I've got an Xbox and a PS2 and I've used the GameCube a bit as well. It has the be said the Graphics really are not that important in this current generation of consoles as there are so few good games to pick from.
If only the Xbox had a good CPU to back up its really good GPU. The PS2 CPU is faster than the Xbox and this shows in the way it can still make pretty games (MGS2 takes advantage of this) even when its GPU is some 25% slower and has less features than the Xbox.
Only one of the three machines was ever cutting edge and that was the PS2 - when it came out nothing could touch it for 3D speed apart from professional PC graphics cards that cost thousands. The Xbox is already slow compared to the GeForce4 Ti cards and not even that hot compared to the old GF3 Ti-500. The GameCube is based on old ATI and PowerPC technologies so speed wise its well behind the Xbox and the PS2.
As for games, it has to be the GameCube that is doing the best for new releases followed by the PS2 and the Xbox dead last. I'm really disappointed that I payed out my cash for an Xbox. Even the so called Killer titles are not great. I've followed Halo's progress for years on the Mac and the PC and what it has become is a sad shell of the fantastic online experience it was meant to be. After seeing the previews of Unreal Tournament 2003 (no not Campionship which looks bad again) it is fair to say Halo looks old and is nothing special - the only remark I have is that its got good textures. All the rest of the games on the Xbox are pretty dire - DOA3 is ok but it DOA2 plays better on the PS2. All the car games are shocking - not up to PS1 or N64 levels of playability and graphics wise GT3 still beats them all hands down (I know I was stoooopid to go out and get all the Xbox car games - DOH!).
As for the PS2, it still seems to get the classics that define the current consoles - MGS2, GTA3, GT3 and Tekken. Sure some of these will make their way to the other consoles but they will be later and on those other nasty joypads. But remember they will not all be converted as many are owned by Sony how seemed to grab many of the good licences before Microsoft went shopping.
Then you've got the GC with all the Nintendo games and more Saga games than the Xbox and the PS2. These 2 forces can not be ignored and although you won't always get the type of games you get on the Xbox or the PS2 you will probably always have more fun. The only downside is that it can't play DVD (unless you get the Panasonic GC) but its fair to say the Xbox can't either - even when you BUY the remote so you can watch them the quality is SO poor, nothing on the PS2.
So to sum up. I would never recommend that anyone I liked purchase an Xbox unless they already have a PS2 and a GC - it is quite simply that bad. There are more games lined up for both the PS2 and the GC. Shoppers have been voting with their feet worldwide and the Xbox is selling badly. In Japan the PS2 out sells the Xbox 5 to 1 and the GC out sells it 3 to 1. Worldwide the PS2 is selling about 3 to 1 better than the Xbox and the GC is doing atleast as well as the Xbox.
If you don't have a console and Nintendo games don't make an entrance in your top 5 games of all time (they should do
) then get a PS2, but just be prepared for a less inventive set of games than you experienced with the PS1 came out (those were the days, well, and when the SNES came out, and who could forget when the Amiga 500 was top dog and the Spect....) . If you even slightly like Nintendo games and have a DVD player then I would try the GC - it is lots of fun and future releases are looking good - this isn't another N64. If you like to cry in the corner of your living room wondering why you wasted your money and all your games are sub standard and not fun after 5 mins of playing get and Xbox. You could just buy a spade and hit yourself on the head with it till you pass out as thats prolly more fun that you'll ever get out of your Xbox.
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 8:44am
Post 9 of 66
I neeeeeeed a gamecude I neeeeeeeed my monkey ball fix
Actually I haven't scraped together the mullah to buy any of the above
Although I do still have my snes wired up for a good old blast on bomberman. Im a bit of a Nintendo kid at heart. So yes that single gamecube vote is mine.
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 10:08am
Post 10 of 66
my vote was for ps2, as it's the only one i got...
i played on schwar's x-box, wasn't impressed with it...
GameCube on the other hand, i want it, and i want it now, it looks so much fun, but i am unsure how the controllers fair up, they look like nncomortable copies of the ps2 ones, but still, i may be wrong...
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 10:26am
Post 11 of 66
For pure technical muscle: Xbox, Gamecube, PS2.
For variety and quality of games: PS2, Xbox, Gamecube - but the PS2 is losing ground all the time.
For ease of development: Xbox, Gamecube, PS2 - PS2 is a bloody nightmare to program, whereas Xbox is a joy.
IMHO, the only advantage of PS2 is Sony's enormous market share, but as the other platforms encroach on that with more technically impressive games, the PS2 will really feel the squeeze. No wonder Sony are accelerating the PS3 launch...
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 10:27am
Post 12 of 66
"I have to bite my tongue on this one. If there is one thing that upsets me the most, is how ignorant some people can be when it comes to consoles. SFB said it right, I have..to...stay...away... " - Hajiku_Flip
Heh, I just read Hajiku_Flip's posts on Scope and the one he made here and it made me laugh as you seem to be a little wrong in just about everything you say.
Firstly, the one Xbox to PS2 game you compare is just silly. If you try to find some Xbox games that look nicer than GT3 and MGS2 you will find it hard, very hard.
Secondly you talk about generations of games saying that the PS2 is on its 5th or 6th and the Xbox is on its first, just imagine what the Xbox will look like when its on its 6th. Well it will look EXACTLY the same as they do now. The emotion engine and the GPU on the PS2 are hard to code for, and developers are finding better ways to use them all the time - like the PS1. The Xbox is already running at 100% as the hardware/software is tried and tested and developers have used them for ages. This is point of the Xbox so the graphics are not going to get any better - sorry.
Lastly, someone said that the Xbox is faster in everyway and this is not true. Although the Pentium in the Xbox is clocked higher, the Emotion Engine inside PS2 is actually a more powerful chip - up to 50% faster at many things. With the Xbox processor already having trouble with games like Halo - and it really does when there are loads of AI characters and animation going on - you can see why many people find the final specs of the Xbox so unimpressive. If they had stuck with the specs they started with then it might be a killer system, but as it is its just a little better at graphics than the PS2, has a slower CPU and has a load of crappy games.
Yeah Halo has really cool textures but I think MGS2 is just as good looking if not better, and so what if Gotham Street Racer has realtime reflection mapping - it doesn't even compare to GT3 graphically or in gameplay.
Since when does the Xbox not have jaggies? For the console that was meant to get rid of them I still see most of the games have AA off or at a very low level - could this be because they have run out of 3D power - I think so.
"For pure technical muscle: Xbox, Gamecube, PS2. "
I wish people could check what they are talking about - the PS2 is much more powerful than the GC. Its only the GPU that stops the PS2 being the most powerful as the CPU in the PS2 kick the Xbox all over the place.
By the way Microsoft has announced Xbox2 as world sales are going so badly - crazy time to start talking about your next console unless you are giving up...
Last edited Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 10:45am; edited 6 times in total.
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 10:27am
Post 13 of 66
All three have merit but Halo tips me to the x-box. That game rocks.
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 10:34am
Post 14 of 66
X - Read up on what Halo was meant to be.
Bungie were a great company and Halo was going to be the best online war game ever until they had to cut it down for Xbox. Atleast they got it finished but the only good thing about the game is the textures and the AI. Most of the levels are just the same rooms again and again...
I'm with UT2003 - FPS should be on ya PC
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 10:48am
Post 15 of 66
I just dont really understand the attraction of consoles.
Somebody care to explain why anybody would want one, instead of getting a PC that can also do everything a computer can do (other than just play games)?
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 10:54am
Post 16 of 66
i prefer a console for certain types of game, like racing games i prefer using the ps2 controller, than say a keyboard and mouse...
also consoles are EASIER, well for me anyway, what i mean is that u get a console, set it up, and that is it, u don't have to worry about spending even more cash on a gfx card and stuff to make gaes look nicer, they r what they r on a console...
i mean i have medal of honour on pc, and i have it on the best i can run it at, but when my mate brought round the ps2 one, it was a lot nicer looking (except the explosions on the ps2 one are bit sucky)...
i just like having a console because A.) i prefer the control method for some games, not FPS though, need a pc for that, but stuff like racing games, and space sims... B.) They r easy, don't need to upgrade them to play the latest killer game...
it may be different for other people, but that's how i feel about them...
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 10:56am
Post 17 of 66
Im 4 XBOX... Games like Dead or Alive 3 and Halo make it the best, but the PS2 has great games aswell
If only Super Smash Bors. Melee came out 4 the XBOX coz it looks good
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 11:20am
Post 18 of 66
The PS2 gets my vote because the game designers are without doubt putting most of their effort into Sony based software with its high market share.
Computor based games are a totally different ball game.
I really should find something better to do!
OOOPS! what do I know.....look below!
Last edited Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 11:55am; edited 1 times in total.
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 11:35am
Post 19 of 66
Schwar - I know what I'm talking about :) I'm a console programmer.
You're so wrong about the Xbox already running at 100% of it's capability. The vertex and pixel shader hardware is brand new and developers are only just learning how to use them. 5th and 6th gen Xbox games will look MUCH better than current ones.
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 11:46am
Post 20 of 66
Right, as a Microsoft developer and a Sony developer I can tell you you are wrong. What company do you work for? I know a fair bit about the ATI and PowerPC systems in the GameCube as they are not that far abstracted from the Mac's I've been using and codin on since the PowerPC came out.
All the teams I know working on projects still say there is something left in the PS2 while games like Halo use just about all the Xbox has to give. Even Nvidia have said that they should have waited for the full GF4 in the Xbox rather than the hybrid chip it uses. Every game developer I know was shocked when by the slow CPU in the Xbox..
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 12:32pm
Post 21 of 66
I work for Traveller's Tales. We've been working on Xbox for about 14 months and have barely scratched the surface of what we can do with the vertex and pixel shaders. NVidia themselves are constantly releasing new shader programs. And no Xbox games do anything interesting with the hard disk yet. It's patently ridiculous to say that any launch title pushes any platform to the limit.
And NVidia would say that, wouldn't they :) Of course the GF4 would have been better, but the hybrid is still good.
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 12:47pm
Post 22 of 66
Schwar don't get me wrong. It stinks what Microsoft did to Halo's company. That is there MO. If they see something they want but can't get they buy it. Halo still rocks though. Come on... admit it.
My brother has a ps2 and it is awesome. My nephew has the gamecube and he likes it too.
I just like video games. I can still play my Star Trek game where your ship is an E and the Kligons are a K and you have space marines and .....
I forgot everyone warned me in chat not to bring up the Xbox to Schwar. Sort of like chesse with Curly in the stooges.
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 12:50pm
Post 23 of 66
hehe, now tell him you dont like Macs. Lets see if we can make him explode
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 1:03pm
Post 24 of 66
X - Only one of my friends thinks Halo rocks, all the rest got pretty bored after a couple of days and we only ever use it to do Warthog Jumps now. It just doesn't compare to the same sort of games on the PC. I don't think it rocks at all - after following its progress for years I am very sad that it has ended up like it is, I can only hope the Mac and PC versions are better (but I'm not expecting it).
Right so the hard disk will be an advantage (once you've got the stuff installed off it) but as Microsoft say, you have to clean up afterwards so you can't leave stuff on there apart from saved games and init data. This can help you with streaming data, textures and saving games but thats about it as its strictly forbidden to make patches etc.
Qixotl - just because your company haven't used all the features of the GF3 doesn't mean other haven't. Halo uses just about every hardware specific option the GF3 has to offer from per pixel shading to compressed textures and it maxes the poly count (and then some) in many areas of the game.
Things can always be made faster but in the Xbox's case this will be because of compromise rather than optimisation and innovation. With more simple meshes and lower quality textures it won't be hard to increase speed, and if the textures are more realistic (I find Halo quite cartoon) then you can make better looking games - i.e. the new Xbox Unreal. But this isn't how things work with PS2 and it is not an improvement in speed - it is just using the same speed in different ways. Both Halo and Unreal use about 95% of what the Xbox has to give in 3D power, just in vastly different ways.
The 1st generation PS2 (an PS1) games on the otherhand used only 40% of what the console had to offer but after the programmers learn more of what the console can do the actual poly count can increase as can the level of detail in the models and the texture quality. This is where the PS2 is a vastly different machine to the Xbox and why it has different generations of games in a way the Xbox never will. There is not the same level of learning to do about the Xbox system, which is good, but also means that generations of gaming on a graphics level won't really happen.
Sure at the end of it all the Xbox has a more powerful GPU and will therefore be able to have better graphics than the PS2 - but only if you get the best developers on it. The PS2 has the edge when it comes to CPU with the Emotion Engine being faster than the Pentium at just about everything.
At the moment the best games developers are on the PS2 and with worldwide sales of the Xbox being very poor this isn't going to change. Sure the Xbox will get mildly tweaked versions of half these PS2 games a few months after they come out but I can't see the Xbox being a real threat to the PS2 and I think Microsoft are kind of giving up as well - hence the official announcement about the Xbox2.
Malone - don't make me....
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 1:32pm
Post 25 of 66
The Xbox hard disk can store a lot more than saves and settings. Check out Blinx or Project Ego.
Halo is very pretty but we do stuff they don't, just as they do stuff we don't. You can't claim they use every hardware specific option, because the shaders allow you to customize the hardware to do whatever you want (within certain limits). Eg: we run a water simulation on the hardware, but we don't use detail textures...yet. Optimising games is always about compromise, unless the developer doesn't fully understand the hardware. How is the steep learning curve of Sony hardware an advantage?
The worldwide sales of the Xbox aren't bad considering they're trying to break into a Sony-dominated market. They'll never overtake Sony but they'll provide healthy competition (which is exactly what the industry needs with Sega and Nintendo giving up making hardware).
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 1:35pm
Post 26 of 66
I wouldn't use a Mac if there were a pen and paper around. Heck if I had a stick and dirt I would use it over a Mac!
And boy, that PC aritechture makes a Mac look like it has one of the flinstone squirels powering it!
*Quickly switches of to Schwar cam *
PS. Bet I just blew any chance I ever had of becoming a mod!
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 1:53pm
Post 27 of 66
"The Xbox hard disk can store a lot more than saves and settings. Check out Blinx or Project Ego"
I know, but there are so many limitation set by Microsoft that its not as useful as it could be.
"Halo is very pretty but we do stuff they don't, just as they do stuff we don't. You can't claim they use every hardware specific option, because the shaders allow you to customize the hardware to do whatever you want (within certain limits). Eg: we run a water simulation on the hardware, but we don't use detail textures...yet. Optimising games is always about compromise, unless the developer doesn't fully understand the hardware. How is the steep learning curve of Sony hardware an advantage?"
I never said it was an advantage - and it isn't. Thats not my point. The point I was making is that due to the simple transition from PC to Xbox (well fairly simple) developers are already running at a level that was not possible with the first 4 or 5 generations of games on the PS2.
We were talking about generations of gaming graphics and I was saying don't expect huge differences between what the Xbox does now and what it does next year - so you are kinda saying the same thing. We already know the limitations of the GF3 chip and people can work to these and uses the many cool hardware features (btw I said Halo uses just about every hardware feature, which its does, saying you can program them doesn't change that - I'd didn't say it uses every single one) but don't expect a 200% to 500% rise in graphics quality/speed/poly count like we have had on the PS2 over the same periods.
The Xbox can benifit from program optimisation and Driver Updates from Microsoft and Nvidia to a point (its helped a small amount so far) but not like the PS2. All these people waiting for the amazing graphics in the 6th generation of Xbox games need to be aware that it won't be like the changes on PS2 games.
Halo was developed as much as a game as it was a demo for Microsofts new hardware therefore it shows how good things can be - it is currently almost a competition between developers to see who can make better use of the GPU.
We've said it all now, the Xbox's GPU is more powerful than the PS2. The PS2 is more powerful than the GC. But since when has power alone helped. The N64 was more powerful than the PS1 and the Saturn, Apple Macs are more powerful than PCs - it doesn't help unless you have the market and developers.
This is where both the PS2 and the GC win over the Xbox. PS2 because of its history and huge dedicated developer base and the GC with its unique Nintendo style games and the most support for Saga. Xbox could have been great, but it isn't. Maybe Xbox 2 will be
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 2:28pm
Post 28 of 66
"I know, but there are so many limitation set by Microsoft that its not as useful as it could be."
Who told you that? There's no serious limitations. The HD is divided into several areas to be used for different purposes, that's all.
"don't expect a 200% to 500% rise in graphics quality/speed/poly count like we have had on the PS2 over the same periods."
No, I wouldn't expect anything like that. But the quality of the visuals will still improve as developers work out faster or more accurate algorithms to run on the hardware. It'll be an increase in subtlety rather than in raw power.
"Halo was developed as much as a game as it was a demo for Microsofts new hardware therefore it shows how good things can be"
Or at least, how good things can be on a 1st title using the 1st-gen drivers and libs under extreme time pressure. Do you think Bungie won't do anything different on Halo 2? Of course they can improve it.
"We've said it all now, the Xbox's GPU is more powerful than the PS2. The PS2 is more powerful than the GC. But since when has power alone helped - it doesn't help unless you have the market and developers."
Yeah. Time will tell :)
"This is where both the PS2 and the GC win over the Xbox. Xbox could have been great, but it isn't. Maybe Xbox 2 will be :wink:"
Yup, PS2 dominates now, but Xbox and GC are slowly chipping away at it's market share. Xbox 2 will really have Sony worried ;)
So, you going to port AlamDV to PS2 if Sony release their PC kit in Europe?
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 2:35pm
Post 29 of 66
Schwar, simple logic would show that games would look better an the Xbox as time passed. Not necessarily because programmers know more, but because they have more time to streamline everything. You may have noticed, in the last level of Halo, that there was some slow-down when you passed through explosions. Well, bungie didn't necessarily have time to fix all those little things that eat up unnecessary power. Had they had another year to develop, and released Halo this fall, I can probably bet that they would have been able to cram more polygons and features into the game.
Also, they probably could of beefed up detail had they decided not to load such large chunks of a level. I mean, launch yourself up into the air with grenades in The Silent Cartographer, and you can see the whole level without the frame-rate dropping.
Now, you also think that no other games on the Xbox look as good as Metal Gear Solid 2.
How about Metal Gear Solid 2: Substance, coming to Xbox this fall, and exclusive this year?
You have the original game, plus VR missions, plus the ability to play the game as any of the characters, plus sidequests, plus a skateboarding mini-game.
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 2:36pm
Post 30 of 66
"Also, they probably could of beefed up detail had they decided not to load such large chunks of a level. I mean, launch yourself up into the air with grenades in The Silent Cartographer, and you can see the whole level without the frame-rate dropping."
Thats not true, it has huge slow down, has every time I've tried and many other levels have this as well. Bungie have said thats why there are no fliers on these levels. In the Warthog jump video (whichis the NTSC version) you can see the huge slowdown as well - it goes down to about 10fps.
Heh, I like your other point... MGS2 looks as good on the Xbox as it does on the PS2 - well I would hope so. But it is still was a game developed for PS2 which is why it does look so good
. Sidewinder we all know the Xbox has more graphics punch than the PS2 and in Halos case they use it - it just doesn't really look like it.
Bungie had so much time working on Halo its just crazy (the project is like 5 years old now) and they had direct influence on the features included on the Hybrid GF3. Trust me, things can get better but people that expect PS2 leaps in performance won't get their wishes - but we know that. Things can look prettier/different as tastes change but we are only talking about maybe another 5-10% increase in speed at the most and its already falling behind games that are coming out on the PC what with the GF5 coming out soon and the GF6 and some GF7 specs being announced.
Well the PS2 is the only one we could port to as it has Firewire, standard USB ports and a hard drive update. But its not a practical idea really.
I was hoping the Xbox would include Firewire as it could be cool to edit movies on the Xbox - but no joy. Maybe Xbox2
I think Sony is fine about the Xbox2 really... The PS3 will be just as good, if not better, as it isn't limited to developments that are made for the PC industry - it can make what it wants and, as it proved with the Emotion Engine, it can make amazing technology that can kill Pentiums. Just need to buy some cool video card company now...
And the PS2 also looks so much cooler than the great big Xbox and has so much more cred...
btw, looking at the vote, COME ON GC and PS2
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 3:05pm
Post 31 of 66
I really don't know why people like HALO so much. All I ever see is Tribes 2 in it. I would much rather play Red Faction on my PS2 and just blow shit up for no reason. So the multiplayer aint the best it could be in Red Faction, me and my friends still have a blast tunneling and dropping rocks off the walls to kill the AI.
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 3:08pm
Post 32 of 66
I like the 2 player story mode in Halo... that was one of the best things otherwise it gets boring. Still, link up is shite as you can't use the flying things.
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 3:11pm
Post 33 of 66
woah, I'm scared now...schwar is actually PARTICIPATING in a discussion on the fourms...
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 3:14pm
Post 34 of 66
Hey Qixotl could you help us with something being in the UK and all.
We are currently having problems sorting things with the software distributors we are trying to use. Is there any chance you could suggest a couple of UK/Europe and US distributors - its really hard to find another good one and I'm not sure how things are going to pan out with our current one - Softline.
Cypher - I always did in the FAQ/Tutorial and Development sections - they kinda kept me busy
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 3:17pm
Post 35 of 66
oooo tribes 2, i love that game...
i used to go on a wierd server, that had summit called a Ninka mod, it had cool extra weapons, and vehicles...
one of the vehicles was the scoutflier, but when u got into it, it cloaked, it was great on the watery lvls, u flew to their base, wen tunderwater with it, and parked it where no-one coud find it, then u went up stole the flag, dived into the water, and disappeared - really confused people...
such a great game
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 3:20pm
Post 36 of 66
Hrm...not really my field, I'm afraid. We sign with established publishers on a per-game basis, and once we give them the final release it's out of our hands. I'm afraid you know more than me...this time ;)
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 3:21pm
Post 37 of 66
Thanks anyway. Nice to speak to someone from the UK who is in the industry. What is your current project, anything cool or is it all hush hush?
p.s. I fell like locking this vote now just cause the bars on the voting thing look kinda rude - maybe thats just my sick mind...
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 3:26pm
Post 38 of 66
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 3:28pm
Post 39 of 66
(You can kill me now.... Sorry)
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 3:53pm
Post 40 of 66
Schwar - currently we're working on a game called 'Haven':http://www.gamespot.com
and press the big HAVEN button :)
[/plug - but you did ask!]
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 4:00pm
Post 41 of 66
schwar: he has told u, now all he has to KILL you, bye bye...
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 5:05pm
Post 42 of 66
schwar wrote:I think Microsoft are kind of giving up as well - hence the official announcement about the Xbox2.
Does that mean PS2 is giving up when they announced PS3 a couple days after Halo got GOTY?
And if you read through the scope thread you would of seen that we got no where with this discussion. We all settled on the fact that we all stand by our own systems. I think we should just close this thread and move on.
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 5:16pm
Post 43 of 66
actually, schwar makes good points as to the open source parts of the system and the CPU.
Now i don't know how accurate it is, but it sounds right.
and schwar, maybe you would know: whats the news on linux moving to ps2? i can't find anythign recent on it.
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 5:17pm
Post 44 of 66
personally i like all 3..
with sauakraut (sp?) and maybe a slice of pickle.http://playstation2-linux.com/
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 5:47pm
Post 45 of 66
Does that mean PS2 is giving up when they announced PS3 a couple days after Halo got GOTY?
At least Sony waited till PS2 was out for a year before announcing PS3. I hadn't heard the announcment of XBox2. I had been planning to get one soon. Now, I probably wont even bother getting an XBox.
Oh, and Qixotl, I spent last night reading up on Haven at IGN.com. Looks really cool. Though I'm holding out for the PS2 version - sorry.
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 6:00pm
Post 46 of 66
I think the feeling is, if you can only have one console then get a PS2 - its the best choice. If you can have 2 then its pretty hard to pick but I wish I had got a GC rather than my Xbox, but other people will fell differently.
I know people say that "Microsoft have entered a PS2 dominated market so you can't expect them to do well with their first attempt" and "Just wait till the Xbox2..." but Sony managed to destroy the competition with the launch of the PS1 and it wasn't the first of that generation to come out or the most powerful...
I think Microsoft should stick to doing what they do best, hang on, what the hell do they do best.....hmm.....how the hell is he so rich?
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 6:02pm
Post 47 of 66
"At least Sony waited till PS2 was out for a year before announcing PS3. I hadn't heard the announcment of XBox2. I had been planning to get one soon. Now, I probably wont even bother getting an XBox."
What difference does it make? Did you think the hardware somehow wouldn't date until a replacement was announced? :)
"Oh, and Qixotl, I spent last night reading up on Haven at IGN.com. Looks really cool. Though I'm holding out for the PS2 version - sorry."
Cheers. The PS2 version will be out first, so you won't have long to wait.
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 6:09pm
Post 48 of 66
Hey . . . schwar . . . or anyone else who has played halo . . . . .
Have you done the 16 player thing w/ 4 tv's??? That's why it's cool. It's way better than any internet multiplayer game. NO LAG AT ALL! Period!! That's why x-boxes are so cool. Unreal Champ. will support 32 PLAYERS/8 TV's!!!! NO LAG EITHER!!! Same with Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon!!!
Eh . . . have you seen that old halo stuff?? I wish they included that stuff in the multiplayer levels. Halo 2!
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 6:10pm
Post 49 of 66
"I know people say that "Microsoft have entered a PS2 dominated market so you can't expect them to do well with their first attempt" and "Just wait till the Xbox2..." but Sony managed to destroy the competition with the launch of the PS1 and it wasn't the first of that generation to come out or the most powerful..."
That's 'cos PS1 targeted the mass-market of gaming virgins with a brilliant campaign, instead of competing for the hardcore gamer market. Sony's ad agency won awards for it. It was a master stroke, but it only works once, so now they all have to fight for their market share :) Sony will be king of the hill for a long while yet though.
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 6:10pm
Post 50 of 66
"What difference does it make? Did you think the hardware somehow wouldn't date until a replacement was announced?
That is exactly what it means in the mind of the consumers. It would be like me talking about AlamDV3 now just as AlamDV2 is going into the shops (not that we even know if there will be an AlamDV3).
It doesn't make good business sense to release info about your next product when you have just launched your current one unless you are trying to stop people from buy other peoples products - thats why Sony announced the PS3.
It is great that Haven is out on the PS2 first as it is the main platform for all the best most innovative and cool games
Mechaforce - Yeah I love it when I fill my house with 8 TVs and we all get 1/4 of the screen to play a game that need to be accurate - that just sounds like the best thing -NOT.
I would much rather get some real computers together or play over the internet with is just fine as its really easy to find a good serve with a low ping. I've never had any trouble and its much better on a PC. Ghost Recon on the Xbox - that has to be the funnies thing ever.... You need a monitor running a 1024x768 to even see the snipers half the time. I remember when we used to go into the DC Quake games on our PCs just to shot all the DC players as we had so much more control with a mouse and joystick...
Hehehe - Ghost Recon....on an Xbox....
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 6:17pm
Post 51 of 66
"That is exactly what it means in the mind of the consumers. It would be like me talking about AlamDV3 now just as AlamDV2 is going into the shops (not that we even know if there will be an AlamDV3)."
Have you got a source for this official Xbox2 announcement then? All I've heard is rumour and speculation.
You should try 4-way Halo on a projector. Split-screen works pretty well on a 10'x6' patch of wall :) I must try it with Project Gotham...
Last edited Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 6:19pm; edited 1 times in total.
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 6:18pm
Post 52 of 66
I really have to go with XBOX. Followed by PS2 then Gamecube. I don't really like GameCube that much. I only like the game Super Smash Bros. Melee. PS2 I would have to say is good only for it's variety of games and XBOX is the best because of it's 733 MHZ Processor and it's incredible graphics accelerator.
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 6:20pm
Post 53 of 66
Got a projector, its ok but too blocky - doesn't compare to a PC at all.
But the 733Mhz processor in the Xbox is slower than the CPU in the PS2.
I now understand why Apple have such trouble telling people that their 933Mhz G4 is faster than a 2Ghz P4. Clock speed is only one part of the speed equation, but as the PS2 doesn't use a Pentium you can not compare like for like as the PS2's is actually faster.
I got the Xbox2 info in a couple of emails a week or so ago - I'll try and hunt down those bitches
P.S. Please don't tell me you like Project Gotham!!! That game sucks so much. GT owns it totally. How the hell you are meant to drive with those huge nasty controllers I don't know, and what with it driving like a dog as well.
Last edited Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 6:29pm; edited 3 times in total.
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 6:24pm
Post 54 of 66
have any of you actually sat beside a ps2 and xbox playin the same game at the same time??!?!?
i have, and the xbox graphics quality is better, but not by soo much as to simply buy the system. plus, consoles are about the games, if you care for graphics, get a PC with some crazy card, or just don't bother at all.
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 6:27pm
Post 55 of 66
Yeah I never heard anything about it either. I was just taking his word for it. I think I would of heard about it someone down the line, but maybe not. And to continue on with the scope-e thread theme, PS2 SUXXORS!1111
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 6:29pm
Post 56 of 66
"Ghost Recon on the Xbox - that has to be the funnies thing ever.... You need a monitor running a 1024x768 to even see the snipers half the time."
Funny you should say that - you can get a 1920x1080 image out of the Xbox if you have an HDTV and the right AV pack - and if the developer can keep the framerate up at that res.
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 6:30pm
Post 57 of 66
ive heard the news about xbox2 in numourous places, and it started about a week or two ago.
ps3 though, this is the first place ive heard about it. when's the projected launch?
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 6:31pm
Post 58 of 66
HDTV! Shame we are in England and that no games are supporting it. Its all well and good saying the Xbox can do it but untill its supported it is no use at all.
The hardly helps you when you have 4 player split screen on a 28" TV. It also doesn't help trying to be pixel accurate with a joypad and don't start talking about attaching 4 keyboards and mice to your xbox and all sitting round the TV - I have enough trouble with 4 joypads.
Last edited Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 6:36pm; edited 2 times in total.
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 6:31pm
Post 59 of 66
What difference does it make? Did you think the hardware somehow wouldn't date until a replacement was announced?
Of course not. I'm already expecting PS6 and a Nintendo Game Implant - some day. My point is that not everyone is a game developer, just gamers with a limited budget. And a lot of consumers aren't going to shell out the cash for a system that might not have much support in a year.
As an example, back in the 80's I bought an Atari 5200 when it came out. It was the best system available at the time, but it didn't sell as well as the 2600 or 4700, and so after a couple of months, I was left in the cold.
So, if XBox2 is already coming relatively soon (though I admit this board is the first I've heard of it), I'm not gonna bother.
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 6:34pm
Post 60 of 66
On the subject of playing the consoles side-by-side, yeah, XBox and GC look better than PS2 to me, but the graphics are soo good on all systems, it realy doesn't matter to me.
That, and I despise the XBox controller.
Hated it when Dreamcast used it, too.
PS2 for me.
Last edited Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 6:37pm; edited 1 times in total.
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 6:37pm
Post 61 of 66
GC graphics are fairly horrid compared to both the PS2 and the Xbox but the games play so well that it doesn't matter.
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 6:37pm
Post 62 of 66
Well I wouldn't base my decision entirely on one comment on a forum :)
There's no way MS will release the Xbox2 within 2 or 3 years. They've got to develop their own CPU and GPU first, according to the rumours...plus they'll want to recoup some of their their massive outlay on the Xbox by flogging masses of games.
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 6:40pm
Post 63 of 66
2005 and apparently still with Nvidia which is a good sign.
But like last time they will probably change it a down grade it several time before they release the damn thing...
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 6:41pm
Post 64 of 66
from what i hear, its projected for 2006, and why would they annouce it when they are in like the first or sec generation of their game?
ps2 is in the 6th i think, that's a fiar time
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 6:41pm
Post 65 of 66
This is stupid. Let's just get all 3. And a PC. I'm going to do that.
Sidewinder sez: "Hey schwar, you're wrong about 4-player split screen!!!!! It totally rocks. Have you ever done 16 player? Yeah! How about 8 player with 2 people on each screen."
We just have different opions. It's ok to be different. Except some are better than others. Like ours, for example. Sidewinder sez "X box rules"
OK ok ok . . . don't take it personally. *ahem*
Posted: Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 6:42pm
Post 66 of 66
Sidewinder/Mechaforce - Try playing Ghost Recon 16 players on a PC and it will Rock so much more than the Xbox version. Same with Halo, even if its the same game with just more network options it will be sooooo much better on the PC/Mac.
Oh yeah, maybe we should look at the vote.
I would says thats fair...
Lets all go and do some AlamDV stuff...
Last edited Tue, 2nd Jul 2002, 6:46pm; edited 1 times in total.